{Lamech doubting that Noah was his son.}
I just skimmed through this video youtube.com/watch?v=j9w-i5oZqaQ and heard this interesting excerpt near the end of it, something I hadn’t noticed before in the New Testament.
Part of the main problem in my opinion here is the differences in the definition of the word Angel according to the ancient text versus the definition according to modern pop culture. If you wanted to determine what an Angel was using the Bible or other Near East text alone, you would conclude that {angels} have fully functional bodies, that they can have meals with people, they grab hold of people, they're often mistaken as humans. In the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, the people wanted to rape the angels. We find in the Bible that the angels that decided to rebel and have sex with human women had to leave a certain type of body and exchange it for another one before they could do this. The type of body that they were said to have left is described in this verse as a habitation, and the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, {God} hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day (Jude 1:6). The word habitation there is a rare Greek word called oiketerion which is used only one other time in the New Testament to describe the type of bodies followers of Christ will attain at the resurrection of the dead. So basically the angels were said to have left one type of body for another type, and the second type clearly was capable of sex and reproduction. According to the Bible, there is biblical precedent for the idea that their flesh can do things our flesh does. In other words, if you're going to assume flesh, then it brings with it the capacities and in some senses the limitations as well. In other words, the Bible in detail explains what angels are and what their capabilities with their bodies are.... Ancient cultures, including the writers of the Bible, believed that angels could and did have sex with human women. The various elements of this story are two common in ancient cultures to be chalked up to coincidence, in my opinion. But the details of these consistent reports do not benefit the ancient astronaut theory. In fact, if anything, it supports the idea that the narrative of the Bible is true, or at the very least that the specific details of that narrative was believed by cultures as geographically diverse as the Americas, the Middle East, Asia, Europe and Africa.
I think this supports my suspicion that Jesus was an angel who became human in order to be a role model for us. The Bible says he is our example, which I think essentially means role model. And at his death and resurrection Jesus became an angel again. And that’s what we will become, following his example.